Eeek! Is Judith Curry torqued?

As a sworn science denier, Anthony Watts isn't the least impressed by the heavy hitting findings reported by the IPCC.  What he prefers (archived here) is the "heavy hitting" commentary by the new pinup girl of science deniers everywhere, Professor Judith Curry.

Just in case you didn't realise that Judith Curry has turned into an utter nutter, she is now blurting out nonsense to anyone who'll still take any notice of her.  The sensationalists and muckrakers.  They know they can get Judith to say something outrageously dumb to slake the thirst for scandal of their scientific illiterati readership.  Cosying up with a UK tabloid rag last week, Fox News this week (archived here).

Studying climate is unfortunate, sez Judy

Climate science should do a backwards rotating flip - or some such thing, sez Judith Curry.  No more studies of the atmosphere, oceans, solar radiation, clouds, sea level, the cryosphere or hurricanes.  Most definitely not ecology or biology or geology or any earth system science.

“I’m not happy with the IPCC,” she told Fox News. “I think it has torqued the science in an unfortunate direction.”

That torquing [of climate science towards climate science], she suggests, is because the money in climate science (the funding, that is) [she means the stuff that pays her salary, her department's operating budget and all her research] is tied to embellishing the IPCC narrative, especially the impacts of global warming. 

Judy is still mulling over how she'd spend the money (the funding, that is).  You've got to wonder who it is that is torqued.

Judith Curry is not at all concerned about global warming, or climate.  Blog hits are another matter.  What's really important is the number of times Judith Curry can get her name mentioned in a tabloid rag alongside Honey Boo Boo or on Fox television.  The article continues:

She is critical of the IPCC’s leadership as well, in particular its chairman, Rajendra Pachauri.
“They have explicit policy agendas,” Curry told Fox News. “Their proclamations are very alarmist and very imperative as to what we should be doing. And this does not inspire confidence in the final product.”

Translation: The IPCC has been tasked quite explicitly, which is done under the leadership of Dr Pachauri.  But Judy doesn't like the agenda the IPCC has been given, which is to report on climate science.  She calls it a "policy agenda". It's "alarmist" to inform people that, for example, seas will rise a lot within a few short decades.  The people don't deserve to know what they are doing to the world. Her "imperative" bit presumably refers to the calculation of how much more CO2 the atmosphere can hold before earth becomes a really dangerous place.

While courting Fox News readers, Judith joins a rather strange person called Anastasios Tsonis, who as far as I can make out, discounts the effect of increasing greenhouse gases in favour of a "theory" of perennially puzzled Bob Tisdale.

What a pair!  They deserve each other.